MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070234015 · doi:10.1103/physreva.77.033844

Super- and subradiant emission of two-level systems in the near-Dicke limit

2008· article· en· W2070234015 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter G. Brooke, Karl-Peter Marzlin, James D. Cresser, Barry C. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Rochester
KeywordsDipolePhysicsLimit (mathematics)Master equationAtom (system on chip)Atomic physicsCoupling (piping)Quantum mechanicsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the stability of super- and subradiant states in a system of identical two-level atoms in the near-Dicke limit, i.e., when the atoms are very close to each other compared to the wavelength of resonant light. The dynamics of the system are studied using a renormalized master equation, both with multipolar and minimal-coupling interaction schemes. We show that both models lead to the same result and, in contrast to nonrenormalized models, predict that the relative orientation of the (coaligned) dipoles is unimportant in the Dicke limit. Our master equation is of relevance to any system of dipole-coupled two-level atoms, and gives bounds on the strength of the dipole-dipole interaction for closely spaced atoms. Exact calculations for small atom systems in the near-Dicke limit show the increased emission times resulting from the evolution generated by the strong dipole-dipole interaction. However, for large numbers of atoms in the near-Dicke limit, it is shown that as the number of atoms increases, the effect of the dipole-dipole interaction on collective emission is reduced.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ASame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207